We show that nonadaptive single-qubit Pauli measurements suffice to test whether an unknown $n$-qubit state $ρ$ is $\varepsilon$-close to or $O(\varepsilon)$-far from an ideal target state $|ψ\rangle$, for all but a $2^{-Ω(n)}$ fraction of target states. The test uses $O(\varepsilon^{-2}\log(1/δ))$ copies of $ρ$ to achieve confidence $1-δ$, which is information-theoretically optimal even among protocols with arbitrary joint measurements.
The main technical innovation is an uncertainty principle for weighted generalizations of the total influence of Boolean functions. As a simple example, the unweighted variant states that $\mathbf{Inf}[f]+\mathbf{Inf}[\widehat{f}] = Ω(n)$, which is a natural hypercube analogue of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (here $\widehat{\,\cdot\,}$ denotes the $2^{-n/2}$-normalized Fourier transform). The weighted case generalizes $\mathbf{Inf}[\,\cdot\,]$ and $\mathbf{Inf}[\,\widehat{\,\cdot\,}\,]$ to Dirichlet energies associated with Glauber dynamics for certain dual measures on the cube.
We show that nonadaptive single-qubit Pauli measurements suffice to test whether an unknown n-qubit state ρ is ε-close to or O(ε)-far from an ideal target state ∣ψ⟩, for all but a 2−Ω(n) fraction of target states. The test uses O(ε−2log(1/δ)) copies of ρ to achieve confidence 1−δ, which is information-theoretically optimal even among protocols with arbitrary joint measurements.
The main technical innovation is an uncertainty principle for weighted generalizations of the total influence of Boolean functions. As a simple example, the unweighted variant states that Inf[f]+Inf[f]=Ω(n), which is a natural hypercube analogue of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (here ⋅ denotes the 2−n/2-normalized Fourier transform). The weighted case generalizes Inf[⋅] and Inf[⋅] to Dirichlet energies associated with Glauber dynamics for certain dual measures on the cube.
A central task in quantum information science is state certification: testing whether an unknown state is ε1-close to a fixed target state, or ε2-far. Recent work has shown that surprisingly simple measurement protocols--comprising only single-qubit measurements--suffice to certify arbitrary n-qubit states [Huang, Preskill, Soleimanifar '25; Gupta, He, O'Donnell '25]. However, these certification protocols are not robust: rather than allowing constant ε1, they can only positively certify states within ε1=O(1/n) trace distance of the target. In many experimental settings, the appropriate error tolerance is constant as the system size grows, so this lack of robustness renders existing tests inapplicable at scale, no matter how many times the test is repeated.
Here we present robust certification protocols based on few-qubit measurements that apply to all but a O(2−n)-fraction of pure target states. Our first protocol achieves constant robustness, i.e. ε1=Θ(1), using a single O(logn)-qubit measurement along with single-qubit measurements in the Z or X basis on the other qubits. As a corollary of its robustness, this protocol also achieves constant (in n) copy complexity, which is optimal. Our second protocol uses exclusively single-qubit measurements and is nearly robust: ε1=Ω(1/logn). Our tests are based on a new uncertainty principle for conditional fidelities, which may be of independent interest.
We consider a fundamental problem of \emph{mixedness testing}: Given n copies of an N-qubit state ρ, determine whether ρ=Id/d or ∥ρ−Id/d∥1≥ε with high probability, where d=2N. In particular, we focus on performing this task in the practical setting of single-qubit measurements, where measurements are prepared independently on each qubit. We provide a nearly complete picture of single-qubit mixedness tesing by showing n=Θ~(10N/ε2). To establish our lower bound, we introduce a measurement-dependent lower bound framework for adaptive single-copy state certification. For the upper bound, we present a randomized Pauli basis measurement protocol, which relies on a new primitive for computationally efficient uniformity testing of correlation-concentrated distributions on the Boolean hypercube. In conjunction, we provide lower and upper bounds for mixedness testing with fixed Pauli measurement protocols.
A central task in quantum information science is state certification: testing whether an unknown state is є1-close to a fixed target state, or є2-far. Recent work has shown that surprisingly simple measurement protocols – comprising only single-qubit measurements – suffice to certify arbitrary n-qubit states. However, these certification protocols are not robust: rather than allowing constant є1, they can only positively certify states within є1=O(1/n) trace distance of the target. In many experimental settings, the appropriate error tolerance is constant as the system size grows, so this lack of robustness renders existing tests inapplicable at scale, no matter how many times the test is repeated.
In this work, we consider the fundamental task of quantum state certification: given copies of an unknown quantum state ρ, test whether it matches some target state σ or is ε-far from it. For certifying d-dimensional states, Θ(d/ε2) copies of ρ are known to be necessary and sufficient. However, the algorithm achieving this complexity makes fully entangled measurements over all O(d/ε2) copies of ρ. Often, one is interested in certifying states to a high precision; this makes such joint measurements intractable even for low-dimensional states. Thus, we study whether one can obtain optimal rates for quantum state certification and related testing problems while only performing measurements on t copies at once, for some 1<t≪d/ε2. While it is well-understood how to use intermediate entanglement to achieve optimal quantum state learning, the only protocol known to achieve optimal testing is the one using fully entangled measurements.
Our main result is a smooth copy complexity upper bound for state certification as a function of t, which achieves a near-optimal rate at t=d2. In the high-precision regime, i.e., for ε<d1, this is a strict improvement over the entanglement used by the aforementioned optimal protocol. We also extend our techniques to develop new algorithms for the related tasks of mixedness testing and purity estimation, and show tradeoffs achieving the optimal rates for these problems at t=d2 as well. Our algorithms are based on novel reductions from testing to learning and leverage recent advances in quantum state tomography in a non-black-box fashion. We complement our testing upper bounds with a (nearly) matching lower bound that holds in the high-precision regime, implying that one must take t≥Ω(d2) to achieve the optimal rate for certification.
A fundamental task in quantum information science is state certification: testing whether a lab-prepared n-qubit state is close to a given hypothesis state. In this work, we show that every pure hypothesis state can be certified using only O(n^2) single-qubit measurements applied to O(n) copies of the lab state. Prior to our work, it was not known whether even subexponentially many single-qubit measurements could suffice to certify arbitrary states. This resolves the main open question of Huang, Preskill, and Soleimanifar (FOCS 2024, QIP 2024).
This paper studies the quantum identity testing problem, a quantum analogue of distribution identity testing. The goal is to determine whether a quantum state is identical to another fixed quantum state, using as few state samples as possible. Rather than general entangled measurements, we consider the less powerful but experimentally friendly Pauli measurements. We follow the standard setting where Pauli measurements are regarded as two-outcome measurements, i.e., eachn-qubit Pauli measurement has a one-bit outcome. We prove that for ann-qubit quantum system, the sample complexity of this problem isΘ(poly(n)⋅ϵ24n)if only Pauli measurements are allowed. In other words, we provide simple algorithms to determine whether twon-qubit quantum states,$\rho and\sigma ,areidenticalor\epsilon −farintracedistanceusingPaulimeasurements,usingO\left({\min \{n^{4},n^{3}+\log ^{3}(1/\epsilon)\}\cdot \frac {4^{n}}{\epsilon ^{2}}}\right)copiesof\rho and\sigma .Interestingly,\mathcal {O}\left({\frac {4^{n}}{\epsilon ^{2}}}\right)$copies are not sufficient under this setting.